Talk:John McFall (athlete)/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Failed "good article" nomination[edit]
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of June 27, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: Fail
- 2. Factually accurate?: Pass
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Fail
- 5. Article stability? Fail
- 6. Images?: Fail
It needs to be cleaned up. And it must stand up to the test of time and alternative perspectives. The article has been revised by only one editor. The image is lousy and adds basically nothing to the article.
When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.
- I am afraid that I disagree with this assessment of the article for the following reasons:
- Writing: The GA reviewer claimed that the article "needs to be cleaned up" but did not specify which aspects of the article needed cleaning up. Further, I do not believe that the fact that the article has only been edited by one person (me) is a proper reason for failing it.
- Neutral point of view: The reviewer stated that the article failed the "neutral point of view" test, but did not state why. Furthermore, it is not clear at all what the remark "it must stand up to the test of time and alternative perspectives" means.
- Article stability: In what way is the article unstable? It is not the subject of any ongoing content dispute.
- Image: The image may not be of particularly high quality, but I dispute that it is "lousy". It is a properly-licensed image that shows what the subject of the article looks like. In any case, this is not a ground for failing the article since the presence of images are not essential to an article achieving GA status.
- I will therefore be renominating the article. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 04:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)